Eyeworld

SUMMER 2025 | EYEWORLD | 19 EYEWORLD JOURNAL CLUB by Pete Weber, MD, Nikita Mokhashi, MD, Sukriti Mohan, MD, Chris Maatouk, MD, Daniella Schochet, MD, Arjav Shah, MD, Rebecca Tanenbaum, MD, Lauren Ciulla, MD, Phil Zhou, MD, University of Chicago ophthalmology residents, Peter Veldman, MD, Residency Program Director single surgeon using a standard 2.2-mm incision phacoemulsification technique with capsu- lar bag IOL implantation. Demographic data collected included age and sex. Objective data were gathered from preoperative and 3-month postoperative visits. Preoperative examinations included corneal curvature, axial length, and topography. IOL power was calculated using the Barrett Universal II formula, targeting emmetro- pia for all patients. At the 3-month postopera- tive visit, manifest refraction, corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), intermediate visual acuity (VA) at 70 cm and 50 cm, VA under photopic conditions, and depth of focus within a range of +2.00 D to –3.00 D were recorded. Patients also completed a spectacle independence assessment and a subjective visual satisfaction survey. Statistical analysis employed the Mann-Whitney U test for two-group compar- isons, the Kruskal-Wallis test with Bonferroni correction for three-group comparisons, and chi-square and Fisher's exact tests for cate- gorical data. Statistical significance was set at p<0.05. Results One hundred and thirty eyes from 75 patients were included in this study. Forty-six eyes were treated with the XY1-EM, 47 with the DIB00V, and 37 with the XY-1 monofocal lens. Patients were similar across all demographic and clinical baseline factors, including age, sex, baseline corrected distance visual acuity (CDVA), axial length, and keratometry. Review of "Comparative evaluation of clinical results and patient-reported outcomes of enhanced monofocal and conventional monofocal intraocular lenses" Introduction Enhanced monofocal intraocular lenses (IOLs) are a promising new option for patients seek- ing to reduce their spectacle dependence after cataract surgery. 1–3 While multifocal IOLs can optimize near and intermediate vision with limited compromise of distance vision, they vari- ably induce unwanted visual symptoms such as glare or halos in some cases. Enhanced mono- focal IOLs offer a suitable alternative to multi- focal IOLs, as they minimize these undesirable visual disturbances while also providing some intermediate vision compared to a convention- al monofocal lens. 4,5 This article compared the outcomes of two enhanced monofocal IOLs, the Vivinex Impress XY1-EM (Hoya Surgical Optics) and the TECNIS Eyhance DIB00V (Johnson & Johnson Vision), with the conventional monofo- cal Vivinex XY-1 lens. Methods This retrospective study included patients who underwent cataract surgery and IOL implan- tation with the XY1-EM, DIB00V, or XY-1 IOLs. The Vivinex Impress XY1-EM features a com- bined aspherical anterior surface design, where the central portion allocates incident light to the intermediate range, and the peripheral portion allocates light to the distance range. The TECNIS Eyhance DIB00V incorporates a unique anterior surface design with a continuous power gradient from the periphery to the center, characterized by progressive central steepening. Both lenses aim to extend the depth of focus beyond what is achieved with a standard mono- focal lens. Patients included had no prior history of ocular surgery or ocular disease that might have affected surgical outcomes. Those with clinically significant corneal astigmatism were excluded. All surgeries were performed by a EyeWorld Journal Club review continued on page 20 University of Chicago ophthalmology residents Source: University of Chicago Peter Veldman, MD Ophthalmology Residency Program Director University of Chicago Chicago, Illinois

• Cover